Some legal issues of medical privacy in psychiatric practice

2021 ◽  
pp. 111
Author(s):  
Svetlana V. Polubinskaya
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Medical Information ◽  
Digital Health ◽  
Psychiatric Evaluation ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Negative Consequences ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Forensic Psychiatric ◽  
Medical Privacy

The article discusses a number of issues associated with medical privacy in psychiatry, including forensic psychiatric evaluation. Current Law of the Russian Federation “On Psychiatric Care and Guarantees of Citizens’ Rights in Its Provision” requires taking into account the mental state of a person with a mental disorder when informing him about his mental health condition. However this rule misses new realities of digital health and is not included into the legislation on protection of citizens’ health. It is hardly possible to realize in practice and it needs an additional and established by law mechanism of access to medical records, considering specific properties of psychiatric patients. Problems also arise with a mentally disordered person's access to his forensic psychiatric medical record. On the one hand, the report of forensic psychiatric evaluation is an evidence in the court case, and the procedure for its disclosure is regulated by procedural legislation and legislation on state forensic expert activities. On the other hand, the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation considers such a report as a medical document, for which the rules of legislation on protection of citizens’ health apply. In this paper the authors propose the solution to this dilemma that requires corrections in the position of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation. The authors analyze the history of legislation on medical privacy and draw attention to obvious long-term trend that shows in continuing expansion of the range of persons who have right to access such information without consent of the citizen concerned. The authors conclude that medical privacy is gradually losing the nature of the right guaranteed by federal law. Especially worrying are the attempts of a number of state bodies and officials to obtain information about mental health of unspecified groups of people. Too many third parties already have access to medical information for various reasons, and the number is growing with introduction of digital health information systems. The authors come to conclusion that such a development can lead to serious negative consequences for the legally guaranteed rights of citizens and stress the importance of special attention to protection of medical information, including measures against unlawful access and possible leaks.

scholarly journals Reasons Why Inflicting Harm is not a Sufficient Indicator of Abuse of the Right

Lex Russica ◽  
2021 ◽  
pp. 22-31
Author(s):  
S. V. Musarskiy
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Civil Code ◽  
Point Of View ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Negative Consequences ◽  
Legal Norms ◽  
Key Factor ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
The Right ◽  
Subjective Rights

One of the most difficult issues of civil law is the determination of the criteria for abuse of rights prohibited by Article 10 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation. Among numerous points of view on this issue, the following has become very widespread in judicial practice: an abuse of the right can be established based on the negative consequences that have occurred for third parties as a result of the exercise of the right. Since these consequences are evident, then the exercise of the right constituted an abuse. Substantial support for this approach is provided by the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation opining that the rule of Art. 10 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation is aimed at implementing the principle enshrined in Part 3 of Art. 17 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation. Having studied the origins of this point of view and its legal foundations, the author noted a number of inherent shortcomings. In particular, this point of view does not distinguish between inflicting unacceptable harm and admissible actions causing harm to another person; it does not take into account the competition of legal norms; it does not take into account that causing harm prohibited by law is an offense and, therefore, it is not an act of exercising subjective rights. These and other shortcomings of the concept of causing harm, noted by the author of the paper, lead to the conclusion that the feature of “causing harm” in itself is insufficient to qualify the act as an act of abuse of the right and the application of Art. 10 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation. In addition to the indicated feature, which is a prerequisite for the application of Art. 10 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, the court must establish another (key) factor, namely: the fact that, in its opinion, allows to distinguish between legal abuse and other lawful and unlawful phenomena.

Features of Judicial Practice in the Russia as the Basis of Precedent

2020 ◽  
pp. 98-106
Author(s):  
V. V. Levin
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Armed Forces ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Judicial Practice ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Law Making

The article is devoted to the analysis of judicial practice as the basis of law-making activity in the Russian Federation, on the basis of which it is possible to create a precedent. Case law in Russia is Advisory in nature and is not mandatory for law enforcement practice. Courts use the signs of case law in their decisions in the reasoned part. Signs of case law is a ruling of the constitutional court of the Russian Federation and regulations of the armed forces of the Russian Federation.

Emergency powers of the authorities of the constituent units of the federation (states) in Russia, the USA and Brazil amid the spread of a new coronavirus infection

2021 ◽  
Vol 30 (3) ◽  
pp. 86-107
Author(s):  
Alexander Merkulenko
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
The United States ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Emergency Powers ◽  
Lack Of Control ◽  
The Usa ◽  
Coronavirus Infection ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
The Government

Due to the new coronavirus pandemic, high alert regimes were introduced across the Russian Federation in spring 2020. These emergency regimes were established exclusively by the state bodies of the Russian Federation’s constituent units – federal authorities did not introduce their own emergency regimes. This decentralized strategy of fighting the pandemic was also introduced by the USA and Brazil. Their states, without the sanction of the federal government, and in the case of Brazil, ignoring its bans, set emergency restrictions similar to those in Russia. The legal regulation of emergency regimes existed before 2020, when constituent units of the federation (states) actively used their emergency powers. However, the regimes introduced during the fight against the pandemic were slightly different to previous ones. The restrictions on rights and freedoms within these regimes were so severe that not only their proportionality was questioned, but there were also doubts as to whether the regional level of the government had the authority to establish such strict restrictions. In addition, the pandemic exposed old problems and revealed new shortcomings in the legal regulation of emergency regimes: lack of control over the realization of the emergency regime by legislative (representative) authorities, and gaps in legislative regulation – notably in the establishment of possible restrictions and of a mechanism for scrutinizing their proportionality. All this raised questions about the proportionality of the established restrictions. The Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation resolved a very insignificant amount of the problems. While the United States and Brazil faced similar issues, the practice of scrutinizing implemented restrictions in these countries was more common. This article takes domestic and foreign experiences into account, while examining certain aspects of the establishment and the operation of regional emergency regimes.

Legal restrictions on the right of association in political parties and their interpretation in court decisions: comparative legal analysis

2021 ◽  
Vol 30 (2) ◽  
pp. 149-179
Author(s):  
Andrey Vershinin
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Political Parties ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Party System ◽  
Large Scale ◽  
Political Competition ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Freedom Of Association ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
The Creation

The article examines the issue of exercising the freedom of association in political parties in Russia in a comparative analysis with the leading democratic countries of the world. Modern democracies cannot be imagined without political parties, which are the representors of the interests of their voters in legislative bodies and local government bodies. The development of civil society and the entire political system in the country depends on how the freedom of association in political parties and the access of parties to participate in elections is realized. The development of legislation on political parties in the Russian Federation proceeded unevenly. In the first years after the adoption of the Constitution the legislative body did not introduce strict requirements for parties. The adoption of a special federal law on political parties in 2001 became a turning point in the development of the party system. The author identifies two large blocks of restrictions on the creation of parties. The first is legislative restrictions, the second is the restrictions that arise from the unfair activities of legislative and law enforcement agencies. In this work, legislative restrictions are compared with restrictions in other democracies, as well as based on legal positions developed by the European Court of Human Rights. The author comes to the opinion that some restrictions on the creation of parties are not necessary now, in the meantime they significantly narrow the possibilities of party creation and political competition. First, we are talking about a ban on the creation of regional parties. The Constitutional Court in its legal positions indicated that this restriction is temporary and will be lifted over time. Within the framework of this work, the author will give suggestions on changing the approach to the creation of political parties in Russia, which should affect the emergence of new strong parties at different levels of public authority. The author believes that a system of “controlled multiparty system” has developed in Russia, which is implemented both in changing the legislation on political parties based on the interests of the “party in power” and the practice of the registration body, which prevents the formation of new parties claiming to redistribute the existing distribution of forces. Based on the analysis of the legislation on political parties, law enforcement practice, decisions of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation, the ECHR and the legislation of foreign countries, the author proposes approaches to reforming the existing party system, which include small cosmetic changes and large-scale changes in approaches to the creation of parties.

scholarly journals Problems of Ensuring a Fair and Cost-Effective Balance of Interests of the Parties to an Employment Contract in the Development of Atypical Employment (Based on the Analysis of the Norms of Chapter 53.1 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation)

Lex Russica ◽  
2020 ◽  
pp. 148-158
Author(s):  
N. V. Chernykh
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Professional Education ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Employment Contract ◽  
Balance Of Interests ◽  
Legal Position ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Atypical Employment ◽  
Further Development

The paper analyzes the problems of ensuring a fair and cost-effective balance of interests of the parties to an employment contract in the development of various forms of atypical employment, including those revealed through the analysis of the norms on the provision of labor to employees (personnel). There are gaps in the legislation regarding the equal level of remuneration of transferred employees in comparison with the regular staff of the receiving party; the lack of opportunities to participate in collective-contractual setting of working conditions; inability to implement the employee’s right to training and additional professional education. The author examines the legal position of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation expressed in the decision of 19.05.2020 No. 25-P "On constitutionality test of Art. 59 part 1 para. 8 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation in connection with the complaint of I. A. Sysoev" regarding the conclusion of a fixed-term contract with transferred to other employers’ workers. The author concludes that the norms of Chapter 53.1 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation do not provide a fair and cost-effective balance of interests of the parties to the employment contract in the development of atypical employment. They may seem effective and useful to employers who use their own employees’ labor to minimize staff costs, but this efficiency is imaginary as it is based on short-term benefits and savings on the development of the organization in the future. In this regard, further development of both legislation and law enforcement practice should be based on ensuring a truly equal status of the regular employees and employees engaged by the employer under the contract for the provision of labor to employees (personnel). In the course of the research, the need to make changes to the Labor Code of the Russian Federation is justified.

scholarly journals TO THE QUESTION ABOUT THE CONCEPT «PROCEDURAL COSTS IN CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS»

Issues of Law ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 20 (4) ◽  
pp. 89-93
Author(s):  
S.M. Darovskikh ◽  
◽  
Z.V Makarova ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Procedure Code ◽  
Procedural Costs ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
Article 5

The article is devoted to the issues of formulating the definition of such a criminal procedural concept as «procedural costs». Emphasizing the importance both for science and for law enforcement of clarity and clarity when formulating the definition of criminal procedural concepts, the authors point out that the formulation of this concept present in the current Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation is far from being improved. Having studied the opinions on this issue of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation, a number of procedural scholars, the authors propose their own version of the definition of the concept of «criminal procedural costs» with its allocation in a separate paragraph of Article 5 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation.

scholarly journals The use of digital technology in the public administration

2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (4) ◽  
pp. 419-428
Author(s):  
Sergey E. Channov ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Information Systems ◽  
Public Administration ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Public Information ◽  
Personal Data ◽  
Digital Technologies ◽  
Specific Area ◽  
Negative Consequences ◽  
The Public ◽  
The Russian Federation

Introduction. The article is devoted to the use of digital technologies in the field of public administration using the example of state and municipal information systems. Currently, two types of such systems can be distinguished in the Russian Federation: 1) allowing direct enforcement activities; 2) used to capture certain information. Theoretical analysis. Information systems of the first type acquire the properties of an object of complex legal relations, in which suppliers and consumers of information, government bodies, as well as other persons become participants. This entails the fact that in the implementation of public administration, the source of regulation of public relations to a certain extent becomes the program code of these information systems. Accordingly, any failures and errors in the public information system become facts of legal importance. Empirical analysis. The main risks of using information systems of the second type in public administration relate to the illegal access (or use) of information stored in their databases. The consolidation of databases containing different types of information is a serious threat. In this regard, the creation of the Unified Federal Information Register containing information about the population of the Russian Federation, provided for by the Federal Law No. 168-FZ of 08.06.2020, may lead to a large number of socially negative consequences and comes into obvious conflict with the legislation on personal data. Results. State and municipal information systems themselves can improve public administration, including reducing corruption in the country. At the same time, their reduced discretion in management decisions is not always appropriate. Accordingly, their implementation should be preceded by the analysis of the characteristics of a specific area of management, as well as the proposed use of digital technologies.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document